On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:28:08 -0600, McKown, John wrote: >Does anybody have any statistics about how much impact (slowing down of >the batch program) using "Transaction VSAM" for accessing VSAM data in >batch would have compared to accessing the same data without it. Any >comparisons with SYSB from H&W? John, Do you have a coupling facility? (My understanding was that you don't.) If you do not have a coupling facility you will not be able to use DFSMStvs (Transactional VSAM) since it requires RLS, which requires a CF for at least 2 structures. I expect that you knew that but this stuff is archived. We have found (just this month) that the elapsed time for the batch job is sometimes unchanged and other times it actually ran faster with DFSMStvs. The CPU time is much more difficult to measure, since SYSB's CPU time is spread across a lot of components. From the measurements that we have, we believe it to be approximately equal (hard to guess what the VTAM & CICS dispatcher overhead for the SYSB stuff actually was). The clear advantage of DFSMStvs is that it does not burden the CICS QR TCB with the batch job's VSAM file processing while still maintaining data buffer coherency and integrity. It does what it says it does without hurting transaction throughput. -- Tom Schmidt
---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
